Typed relevance scores in an identity resolution system

ABSTRACT

Techniques are disclosed for configuring an identity resolution system to support distinct relevance types. Identity records are accessed that are assigned relevance scores of distinct relevance types. Upon determining that the identity records refer to a common individual, the identity records are resolved into an entity representing the common individual. Relevance scores of the distinct relevance types are then determined for the entity, based on the identity records.

BACKGROUND

Identity resolution applications typically perform one or both ofidentity resolution and relationship resolution. Identity resolutionattempts to answer the question “Who is who?”—i.e., determines whethermultiple records that appear to describe different identities actuallyrefer to the same entity (e.g., individual). For example, recordsidentifying two women with different last names may in fact refer to thesame woman having both a familial surname and a married surname.Relationship resolution attempts to answer the question “Who knowswhom?” in order to determine benefits and/or risks of relationshipsamong identities, such as customers, employees, vendors, and so forth,e.g., by cross-referencing data from various sources. For example, arelationship may be identified between two individuals sharing a commonaddress or telephone number. An example of an identity resolutionapplication is InfoSphere Identity Insight, available from InternationalBusiness Machines Corp. (IBM®) of Armonk, N.Y.

SUMMARY

Embodiments of the invention provide a computer-implemented method,computer program product and system for performing an operation thatincludes accessing a plurality of identity records, where the pluralityof identity records includes at least a first identity record having arelevance score of a first relevance type. The plurality of identityrecords further includes a second identity record having a relevancescore of a second relevance type different from the first relevancetype. The operation also includes resolving, upon determining theplurality of identity records refer to a common individual, theplurality of identity records into an entity representing the commonindividual. The operation also includes determining, for the entityrepresenting the common individual and from the plurality of identityrecords, at least a relevance score of the first relevance type and arelevance score of the second relevance type.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

So that the manner in which the above recited aspects are attained andcan be understood in detail, a more particular description ofembodiments of the invention, briefly summarized above, may be had byreference to the appended drawings.

It is to be noted, however, that the appended drawings illustrate onlytypical embodiments of this invention and are therefore not to beconsidered limiting of its scope, for the invention may admit to otherequally effective embodiments.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system for identity resolution,according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example of an identity record, according to oneembodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3 illustrates examples of relevance scores assigned to identityrecords, according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 4 illustrates examples of relevance scores assigned to entities,according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart depicting a method for providing relevance scoresof distinct relevance types, according to one embodiment of theinvention.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart depicting a method for determining relevancescores for an entity, according to one embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart depicting a method for processing a query based onrelevance types, according to one embodiment of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Embodiments of the invention provide an application for identityresolution that is configured to process inbound identity records basedon relevant identities, entities, conditions, activities, or events. Inparticular, the application may be configured to resolve identityrecords to entity accounts, each representing a distinct individual. Asused herein, an entity account (or entity) refers to a collection of oneor more identity records that are believed to describe the same physicalentity. As an example, when “Bob Smith” checks into a hotel room, a homeaddress and telephone number from hotel check-in records may be used tomatch him as being the same person as an entity account for a “RobertSmith” having the same address and phone number. To match “Bob Smith” tothe entity account for “Robert Smith”, the identity record representing“Bob Smith” is compared to a set of individuals, each represented by arespective entity.

In one embodiment, the process of resolving identity records anddetecting relationships between entities may be performed using apre-determined or configurable entity resolution rules. Typically,relationships between two entities are derived from information (e.g., ashared address, employer, telephone number, etc.) in identity recordsthat indicate a relationship between the two entities. Two examples ofsuch rules include the following:

-   -   If the inbound identity record has a matching “Social Security        Number” and close “Full Name” to an existing entity, then        resolve the new identity to the existing entity.    -   If the inbound identity record has a matching “Phone Number” to        an existing entity, then create a relationship between the        entity of the inbound identity record and the one with the        matching phone number.        The first rule adds a new inbound record to an existing entity,        where the second creates a relationship between two entities        based on the inbound record. Of course, the entity resolution        rules may be tailored based on the type of inbound identity        records and to suit the needs of a particular case.

In one embodiment, the application for identity resolution may alsoinclude rules for detecting relevant identities, identities, conditions,or events, i.e., rules for generating alerts based on incoming identityrecords. For example, a rule may check the attributes of an inboundidentity record and generate an alert when a particular match is found(e.g., the inbound identity record is of interest because it includes anaddress within a particular zip-code). Or an alert rule may specifysituations where an assigned role of an inbound identity recordconflicts with an assigned role of another identity record with whichthe inbound record has a relationship at zero or more degrees (e.g., anidentity with an assigned role of “Employee” has a strong relationshipto an identity with an assigned role of “Vendor”). As another example,an alert rule may be defined as a combination of both methods (e.g.,alert whenever an identity with the “Nevada Gaming Black List” role alsohas the “Hotel Guest” role and the hotel involved is located in thestate of “Nevada”). Of course, the relevance rules used may be tailoredto suit the needs of a particular case.

In one embodiment, the application for identity resolution generates analert when the existence of a particular identity record (typically aninbound record being processed) causes some condition to be satisfiedthat is relevant in some way and that may require additional scrutiny bya user (e.g., a business analyst, an investigator of a policedepartment, etc.). The result of these processes is typically a list ofalerts about identities that should be examined by the user. Such alertsmay assist the user in identifying both benefits (e.g., potentialopportunities) and risks (e.g., potential threats and/or fraud).

In one embodiment, the application for identity resolution is furtherconfigured to generate a list of entities related to an inbound identityrecord, based on an entity resolution search. Such an application maynot necessarily have any need of alerting. For example, securitypersonnel may input personal data of a traveler, as the traveler entersa country, to check the identity of the traveler against a watch list.In particular, the inbound identity record (i.e., of the traveler) neednot be loaded into the application, but may nevertheless beentity-resolved against existing entities of the application. Further,the existing entities may contain identity records that includerelevance scores provided by a user. For example, a user may provide ahigher relevance score for a person of greater significance in the watchlist. Entity-resolving the inbound identity record may yield a list ofentity records (and contained identity records thereof) determined torelate to or resolve with the inbound identity record. The applicationmay assign a relevance score to the inbound identity record. Therelevance score represents a measure of how important the individualrepresented inbound identity record is to the user performing thesearch.

In one embodiment, the application for identity resolution may alsodetermine relevant entities outside of the context of watch lists. Forexample, both relevant and seemingly non-relevant identity records maybe provided to the application. However, a user of the application maywish to find relevant entities without having to manage alerts (orlifecycles thereof). For instance, the user may have a set of veryimportant persons (VIPs) with whom the user does business and to whomthe user provides special services. The user may wish to ensure that anypersons related to those VIPs are invited to experience a similar levelof service. In this case, the user may wish to identify all entitiesrelated to the VIPs, ranked by an association relevance determined froma relationship between the VIP and another individual and the relevanceof the VIP. The user may not wish to configure rules for or otherwisemanage alerts—the user merely wishes to know “Who are my most relevantentities?” Further, the user need not be encumbered with a task ofsifting through a list of alerts to pick out entities which happen to bealerted on.

In one embodiment, the application for identity resolution is furtherconfigured to provide typed relevance scores, or relevance scores thatare qualified by a relevance type. Each identity record and/or entitymay be associated with the relevance scores that are qualified byrelevance type. The relevance score of each identity record or entitycharacterizes a level of importance of a given relevance type, where thelevel of importance is attributed to the respective identity record orentity. For example, assume that relevance types include “threat” and“opportunity”. Relevance scores measuring a degree of threat may be usedto generate and/or maintain criminal watch lists. Relevance scoresmeasuring a degree of opportunity may be used to identify customers thatare desirable targets of a new business proposal. Examples of suchcustomers may include repeat customers, customers with a high net worth,customers designated as VIPs and/or persons associated therewith, etc.Of course, those skilled in the art will recognize that other relevancetypes are broadly contemplated. For example, in an alternativeembodiment, the relevance types may include one or more of “nuisance”,“felon”, “fraud”, “sensitive access”, “purchaser”, “competitor”,“vendor”, and “employee rank”.

Depending on the embodiment, the identity records that resolve to anentity may each have a relevance score of a distinct relevance type.Further, one or more of the identity records may have multiple relevancescores, each pertaining to a distinct relevance type. Each relevancescore and/or relevance type of an identity record may be provided to ordetermined by the application. For instance, a user may providerelevance scores for individuals of known relevance. Further, for eachrelevance type, the application may determine a relevance score for anentity, based on one or more relevance scores of identity records thatresolve to the entity.

Accordingly, the application for identity resolution is configured tosupport data analysis from perspectives of distinct relevance types. Forinstance, a data analyst may use the application to generate reportsmore efficiently and/or conveniently at least in some cases. Suchreports may include a report on the top ten threats, a report on the topten business opportunities, a report on the top ten entities who areboth considered a threat and have access to the highest level ofsensitive information within an organization, etc. Alternatively, theapplication may be configured to generate alerts when one or moreentities satisfy criteria for identifying entities who are bothconsidered a threat and have access to the highest level of sensitiveinformation within an organization. Advantageously, the data analystneed not sift through the entities and/or identity records to attempt toinfer the relevance type of a given relevance score. The data analystalso need not refer to other data sources to determine the relevancetype of a given relevance score. Further, the data analyst may generatereports without having to reconfigure the identity resolutionapplication and/or capture relevance scores every time a differentrelevance type is desired in the reports.

In the following, reference is made to embodiments of the invention.However, it should be understood that the invention is not limited tospecific described embodiments. Instead, any combination of thefollowing features and elements, whether related to differentembodiments or not, is contemplated to implement and practice theinvention. Furthermore, although embodiments of the invention mayachieve advantages over other possible solutions and/or over the priorart, whether or not a particular advantage is achieved by a givenembodiment is not limiting of the invention. Thus, the followingaspects, features, embodiments and advantages are merely illustrativeand are not considered elements or limitations of the appended claimsexcept where explicitly recited in a claim(s). Likewise, reference to“the invention” shall not be construed as a generalization of anyinventive subject matter disclosed herein and shall not be considered tobe an element or limitation of the appended claims except whereexplicitly recited in a claim(s).

As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the presentinvention may be embodied as a system, method or computer programproduct. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may take the formof an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment(including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or anembodiment combining software and hardware aspects that may allgenerally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module” or “system.”Furthermore, aspects of the present invention may take the form of acomputer program product embodied in one or more computer readablemedium(s) having computer readable program code embodied thereon.

Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may beutilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable signalmedium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer readablestorage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an electronic,magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system,apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. Morespecific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the computer readablestorage medium would include the following: an electrical connectionhaving one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, arandom access memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasableprogrammable read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber,a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storagedevice, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. In the context of this document, a computer readable storagemedium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or store a programfor use by or in connection with an instruction execution system,apparatus or device.

A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data signalwith computer readable program code embodied therein, for example, inbaseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a propagated signal may takeany of a variety of forms, including, but not limited to,electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable combination thereof. Acomputer readable signal medium may be any computer readable medium thatis not a computer readable storage medium and that can communicate,propagate, or transport a program for use by or in connection with aninstruction execution system, apparatus, or device.

Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmittedusing any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless,wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any suitable combination ofthe foregoing.

Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of thepresent invention may be written in any combination of one or moreprogramming languages, including an object oriented programming languagesuch as Java™, Smalltalk™, C++ or the like and conventional proceduralprogramming languages, such as the “C” programming language or similarprogramming languages. The program code may execute entirely on theuser's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alonesoftware package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remotecomputer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latterscenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computerthrough any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or awide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an externalcomputer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet ServiceProvider).

Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems) and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer program instructions. These computer program instructions maybe provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, specialpurpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus toproduce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via theprocessor of the computer or other programmable data processingapparatus, create means for implementing the functions/acts specified inthe flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.

These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computerreadable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable dataprocessing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particularmanner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readablemedium produce an article of manufacture including instructions whichimplement the function/act specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer,other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to causea series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, otherprogrammable apparatus or other devices to produce a computerimplemented process such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer or other programmable apparatus provide processes forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks.

Embodiments of the invention may be provided to end users through acloud computing infrastructure. Cloud computing generally refers to theprovision of scalable computing resources as a service over a network.More formally, cloud computing may be defined as a computing capabilitythat provides an abstraction between the computing resource and itsunderlying technical architecture (e.g., servers, storage, networks),enabling convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool ofconfigurable computing resources that can be rapidly provisioned andreleased with minimal management effort or service provider interaction.Thus, cloud computing allows a user to access virtual computingresources (e.g., storage, data, applications, and even completevirtualized computing systems) in “the cloud,” without regard for theunderlying physical systems (or locations of those systems) used toprovide the computing resources.

Typically, cloud computing resources are provided to a user on apay-per-use basis, where users are charged only for the computingresources actually used (e.g., an amount of storage space consumed by auser or a number of virtualized systems instantiated by the user). Auser can access any of the resources that reside in the cloud at anytime, and from anywhere across the Internet. In context of the presentinvention, a user may request to execute an application in the cloud,where the cloud provides an API that supports dual-state objects. Forexample, the cloud may provide an application server that supports theAPI. To the extent that the application uses dual-state objects, theprocessing and/or memory costs associated with executing the applicationin the cloud may be reduced relative to a scenario in which the API doesnot support dual-state objects. Having the application execute in thecloud allows the user to manage execution of the application from anycomputing system attached to a network connected to the cloud (e.g., theInternet).

As described above, the cloud may provide an application server thatsupports the API. The application server may provide services toapplications for security, state maintenance, data access andpersistence, via one or more application programming interfaces (APIs).In one embodiment, the application server conforms to the Java Platform,Enterprise Edition (Java EE). As is known, Java EE is a widely usedplatform for server programming in the Java™ programming language. TheJava EE-compliant application server may include one or more containers,such as a Servlet container and an Enterprise JavaBeans (EJB) container,and may provide services such as Java Naming and Directory Interface(JNDI), Java Message Service (JMS), and connection pooling.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality and operation of possible implementations ofsystems, methods and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment or portionof code, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). It should also be notedthat, in some alternative implementations, the functions noted in theblock may occur out of the order noted in the figures. For example, twoblocks shown in succession may, in fact, be executed substantiallyconcurrently, or the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverseorder, depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be notedthat each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, andcombinations of blocks in the block diagrams and/or flowchartillustration, can be implemented by special purpose hardware-basedsystems that perform the specified functions or acts, or combinations ofspecial purpose hardware and computer instructions.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system 100 for identityresolution, according to one embodiment of the invention. The networkedsystem 100 includes a computer 102 that is connected to a data source170 via a network 130. The computer 102 may also be connected to othercomputers via the network 130. The computer 102 may also be connected toother computers via the network 130. The data source 170 stores identityrecords to be sent to the application 150 and/or entity accounts thatthe identity records are resolved against. In general, the network 130may be a telecommunications network and/or a wide area network (WAN). Ina particular embodiment, the network 130 is the Internet.

The computer 102 generally includes a processor 104 connected via a bus112 to a memory 106, a network interface device 110, a storage 108, aninput device 114, and an output device 116. The computer 102 isgenerally under the control of an operating system. Examples ofoperating systems include UNIX, versions of the Microsoft Windows®operating system, and distributions of the Linux® operating system. Moregenerally, any operating system supporting the functions disclosedherein may be used. The processor 104 is included to be representativeof a single CPU, multiple CPUs, a single CPU having multiple processingcores, and the like. Similarly, the memory 106 may be a random accessmemory. While the memory 106 is shown as a single identity, it should beunderstood that the memory 106 may comprise a plurality of modules, andthat the memory 106 may exist at multiple levels, from high speedregisters and caches to lower speed but larger DRAM chips. The networkinterface device 110 may be any type of network communications deviceallowing the computer 102 to communicate with other computers via thenetwork 130.

The storage 108 may be a persistent storage device. Although the storage108 is shown as a single unit, the storage 108 may be a combination offixed and/or removable storage devices, such as fixed disc drives, solidstate drives, floppy disc drives, tape drives, removable memory cards oroptical storage. The memory 106 and the storage 108 may be part of onevirtual address space spanning multiple primary and secondary storagedevices. Further, as described above, the application 150 receivesidentity records and/or entity accounts from the data source 170.Additionally or alternatively, the application 150 may also receiveidentity records and/or entity accounts via the storage 108.

The input device 114 may be any device for providing input to thecomputer 102. For example, a keyboard, keypad, light pen, touch-screen,track-ball, or speech recognition unit, audio/video player, and the likemay be used. The output device 116 may be any device for providingoutput to a user of the computer 102. For example, the output device 116may be any conventional display screen or set of speakers, along withtheir respective interface cards, i.e., video cards and sound cards (notshown). Although shown separately from the input device 114, the outputdevice 116 and input device 114 may be combined. For example, a displayscreen with an integrated touch-screen, a display with an integratedkeyboard, or a speech recognition unit combined with a text speechconverter may be used.

As shown, the memory 106 of the computer 102 includes an application 150for identity resolution, identity records 152, and entities 156. Theapplication 150 may process the identity records 152 to resolve theidentity records 152 to one or more of the entities 156. Each identityrecord 152 may include one or more relevance scores 154. Each relevancescore 154 is qualified by at least one relevance type. The application150 may also determine relevance scores 158 for the entities 156, basedon the relevance scores 154 of identity records 152 that resolve to theentities 156. Each of the relevance scores 158 may also be qualified byat least one relevance type. The application 150 may further determinean overall relevance score for an entity, based on relevance scores ofdifferent relevance types for the entity. The application 150 may alsoreceive a query 160 that specifies to retrieve entities satisfyingpredefined criteria, where the criteria include a specified relevancescore threshold being exceeded for a specified relevance type (or forthe overall relevance score). Advantageously, by configuring theapplication 150 to support relevance types, users of the application 150are provided with improved flexibility in composing queries and/orgenerating reports on relevant entities.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example of the identity record 152 of FIG. 1,according to one embodiment of the invention. As described above, theapplication 150 may receive and match the identity record 152 to atleast one of the (existing) entities 156. As shown, the identity record152 includes fields 202 and values 204. The fields 202 include anidentity record ID 205, a first name 206, a last name 208, a date ofbirth 210, a gender 212, an address 214, a phone number 216, an emailaddress 218, and a social security number (SSN) 220. As shown, theidentity record ID for the identity record 152 is “101”. The first name206 in the identity record 152 is “John”. The last name 208 in theidentity record 152 is “Smith”. The date of birth 210 in the identityrecord 152 is Jan. 1, 1970. The gender 212 in the identity record 152 ismale. The address 214 in the identity record 152 is “123 Main St., LasVegas, Nev. 89123”. The phone number 216 in the identity record 152 is“702-456-1111”. The email address 218 in the identity record 152 is“jsmith@example.com”. The SSN 220 in the identity record 152 is“111-11-1111”. Of course, those skilled in the art will appreciate thatthe fields 202 and values 204 shown in FIG. 2 are merely exemplary andare not intended to limit the scope of the disclosure.

FIG. 3 illustrates examples of relevance scores assigned to identityrecords, according to one embodiment of the invention. As describedabove, each identity record 152 may be assigned one or more relevancescores 308, each relevance score being qualified by a respectiverelevance type 310. As shown, the identity records including a namefield 304 and a relevance scores field 306 and having identity recordIDs of “101” and “102” both resolve to an entity having an entity recordID 302 of “1”. In particular, a first identity record for John Smith anda second identity record for Johnny Smith both resolve to the sameentity. Assume that the relevance scores range on a scale from zero toone hundred, with one hundred representing the highest relevance. Thefirst identity record is assigned a first relevance score 3081 of “50”that is qualified by a relevance type 3101 of “fraud”, representingscores that are relevant to fraud detection. The first identity recordis also assigned a second relevance score 3082 of “20” that is qualifiedby a relevance type 3102 of “sensitive access”, representing scores thatare relevant to users having access to sensitive information in anorganization. The second identity record is assigned a first relevancescore 3083 of “80” that is qualified by a relevance type 3103 of“sensitive access”.

Depending on the embodiment, the relevance scores 308 may be assigned bya user or determined by the application 150 based on other data in theidentity records or external to the identity records. The other data inthe identity record may include a field that indicates a role assignedto the identity record. For example, an employee who is a chiefexecutive officer (CEO) of a company may be assigned a relevance scorehaving a value of “100” and having a relevance type of “employee rank”,on the basis of the role field in the identity record. Similarly, anemployee who is a middle manager of the company may be assigned arelevance score having a value of “50” and having a relevance type of“employee rank”. If the middle manager also has an authority to sign offon purchases—e.g., as indicated by data external to the identity recordsfor the middle manager—then the application 150 may increase therelevance score for the middle manager to a higher value, e.g., “60”.Additionally or alternatively, the relevance scores of an identityrecord may also be determined at least in part based on a type of datasource from which the identity record originates (such as an employeedatabase or a vendor database).

In an alternative embodiment, instead of increasing a relevance score ofrelevance type “employee rank” based on purchasing authority in thecompany, another relevance score of relevance type “purchaser” may beincluded in the identity records. For a given identity record thatrepresents an employee in the company, the relevance score of relevancetype “purchaser” may be assigned a value based on a maximum dollaramount of purchases that the employee has authority to approve. Forexample, an identity record representing an employee that can onlyauthorize small purchases may be assigned a purchaser relevance score of“20”. The identity record may be assigned a purchaser relevance score of“50” if the employee can only authorize medium-sized purchases. Further,the identity record may be assigned a purchaser relevance score of “100”if the employee can authorize large purchases. Each purchaser relevancescore may be determined based on a predefined expression provided by anadministrative user, where the predefined expression may be anymathematical, programmatic, or natural language expression. Additionallyor alternatively, each purchaser relevance score may be determined basedon a user-defined mapping between maximum thresholds of dollar amountand corresponding values for relevance scores.

Further, in some embodiments, the identity record may also include anoverall relevance score that characterizes all relevance scores ofdifferent types that are associated with the identity record. Theoverall relevance score of the identity record may indicate thesignificance of the identity record to an entity account that theidentity record resolves to—relative to other identity records resolvingto the entity account. The overall relevance score for each identityrecord may be determined based on a predefined expression provided by anadministrative user. For example, if the predefined expression specifiesto compute an average of all relevance scores of an identity record,then the identity record for “John Smith” in FIG. 3 may include anoverall relevance score of “35”, and the identity record for “JohnnySmith” may include an overall relevance score of “80”. Further,depending on the embodiment, the application 150 may also be configuredto search for identity records resolving to an entity and having anoverall relevance score satisfying a threshold value, responsive toreceiving a query that specifies the threshold value. The application150 may then output a list of identity records, where the list may besorted by predefined criteria, such as by ascending or descendingoverall relevance score. Advantageously, by configuring the application150 to support different relevance types, each identity record 152 maybe assigned multiple relevance scores, each relevance score representinga measure of relevance of a different type. Accordingly, users of theapplication 150 are provided with improved flexibility in composingqueries and/or generating reports on relevant identity records.

FIG. 4 illustrates examples of relevance scores assigned to entities,according to one embodiment of the invention. As described above, in oneembodiment, the application 150 determines relevance scores to assign tothe entities. As shown, the entity having an entity ID 302 of “1” isassigned relevance scores 402. The application 150 may determine arelevance score 402 of a given relevance type 406, based on respectiverelevance scores 308 having the same relevance type 310. Further, indetermining the relevance score 402, the application 150 may evaluate apredefined expression provided by an administrative user. For example,the predefined expression may specify to compute a relevance score of agiven relevance type for an entity by averaging relevance scores of thesame relevance type that are assigned to identity records resolving tothe entity. Of course, mathematical operations other than averaging maybe used, such as summing, determining a maximum value of a set, or anyother user-defined operations. The predefined expression may also bespecific to a relevance type. Accordingly, entity relevance scores for afirst relevance type may be computed differently than entity relevancescores for a second relevance type.

Assume that the predefined expression specifies to compute the relevancescores for the relevance types “fraud” and “sensitive access” based on amaximum value of relevance scores of the same type, where the relevancescores are assigned to the identity records. Because the maximum valueof the relevance score for “fraud” assigned to the identity records ofFIG. 3 is “50”, the application 150 determines, for the entity, thevalue of “50” as the relevance score 404 ₁ having a relevance type 406 ₁of “fraud”. Further, because the maximum value of the relevance scorefor “sensitive access” assigned to the identity records of FIG. 3 is“80”, the application 150 determines, for the entity, the value of “80”as the relevance score 404 ₂ having a relevance type 406 ₂ of “sensitiveaccess”. Further still, in some embodiments, the application 150 mayalso determine a relevance score 404 ₃ of a relevance type 406 ₃ of“overall”—in other words, an overall relevance score—for the entity. Theoverall relevance score may be determined by a predefined expressionprovided by an administrative user. For example, the predefinedexpression may specify a weighted average to be computed across allother relevance scores assigned to the entity. To this end, thepredefined expression may specify a respective weight for each relevancescore assigned to the entity, where one or more of weights may beuser-defined. The weights characterize some relevance scores as beingmore significant than other relevance scores in determining the overallrelevance score for the entity. For example, relevance scores having arelevance type of “fraud” or “sensitive access” may be deemed moresignificant than a relevance score having a relevance type of “VIP” andmay accordingly be assigned a higher weight. Still further, theapplication 150 may also be configured to update relevance scores for anentity, responsive to changes in relevance scores for an identity recordthat resolves to the entity.

Additionally or alternatively, in some embodiments, the application 150may determine a relevance score for the entity based at least in part ona characteristic of the set of identity records that resolve to theentity, where the characteristic may not necessarily be evident from anyindividual identity record from the set. For example, assume that theentity includes a set of identity records, each having a distinct nameof an individual. Although each identity record merely includes a singlename of the individual, the set of identity records includes multipledistinct names for the individual, which may indicate that theindividual is attempting to commit fraud using aliases. Accordingly, insome embodiments, the application 150 identifies a characteristic ofhaving multiple distinct values for a given field (e.g., name of theindividual) of the entity and determines or modifies a relevance scorefor the entity based on the identified characteristic.

Advantageously, by configuring the application 150 to support differentrelevance types at the entity level, each entity may be assignedmultiple relevance scores, each relevance score representing a measureof relevance of a different type. Users of the application 150 arethereby provided with improved flexibility in composing queries and/orgenerating reports on the entities.

In one embodiment, the application 150 is further configured to generatealerts based on the relevance types. As described above, the application150 may also include rules for detecting relevant identities,identities, conditions, or events, i.e., rules for generating alertsbased on incoming identity records and/or resultant entities. In oneembodiment, one or more of the rules may be dependent on a givenrelevance type. For example, the application 150 may be configured toupdate one or more relevance scores on the basis of processed events.For instance, assume multiple purchasing events are provided to theapplication 150, where the purchasing events are approved by the middlemanager. In one embodiment, the application 150 increases a relevancescore of a “purchaser” relevance type, upon every purchasing eventapproved by the middle manager. Although the amounts and/or frequency ofthe purchasing events may not necessarily trigger an alert, therelevance score of “purchaser” is maintained regularly to indicate thatthe middle manager is responsible for approving purchasing events and/oris using that authority within the company.

In one embodiment, the application 150 may be configured to generatealerts based on relevance types and relationships between entities. Eachrelationship may be characterized by a relationship type. Examples ofrelationship types include employer, employee, vendor, supplier,customer, spouse, father, mother, roommate, etc. Each relationship mayalso include a measure of strength of the respective relationship (alsoreferred to as relationship strength). The relationship strength may beexpressed as a numerical value between one and one hundred, with onehundred representing the highest strength. Each relationship type andrelationship strength may be provided by a user or determined by theapplication 150.

Suppose that the name of the middle manager is John Doe, and thatanother individual, Jane Doe, is a known representative of one of thevendors of the company, having a “vendor” relevance score of “100”.Suppose the application 150 identifies a relationship between the middlemanager and the vendor, based at least in part on John Doe and Jane Doeresiding at the same residential address and sharing the same creditcard number. Suppose that the relationship has a relationship strengthof “98” and a relationship type of “spouse”. In one embodiment, theapplication 150 may generate an alert to indicate that the vendor isrelated to the middle manager and that the middle manager authorizespurchases at the company. Alternatively, a user may submit anappropriate query to the application 150 to identify the relationshipbetween the middle manager and the vendor. Depending on the embodiment,an alert is generated when a relationship is discovered between anemployee and a vendor, where the employee has a purchasing authoritybeyond a specified threshold. In other embodiments, the alert is onlygenerated if the relationship is additionally of a given relationshiptype and/or has a relationship strength that exceeds a specifiedthreshold. Advantageously, configuring the application 150 to supportdistinct relevance types allows such relationships to be identified morereadily and/or conveniently at least in some cases.

FIG. 5 is a flowchart depicting a method 500 for providing relevancescores of multiple relevance types, according to one embodiment of theinvention. As shown, the method 500 begins at step 510, where identityrecords are provided that include at least a first identity recordhaving a relevance score of a first relevance type and a second identityrecord having a relevance score of a second relevance type that isdifferent from the first relevance type. At step 520, upon determiningthat the identity records refer to a common individual, the application150 resolves the identity records into an entity representing the commonindividual. At step 530, the application 150 determines, for the entityand from the identity records, at least a relevance score of the firstrelevance type and a relevance score of the second relevance type. Afterthe step 530, the method 500 terminates.

FIG. 6 is a flowchart depicting a method 600 for determining relevancescores for an entity, according to one embodiment of the invention. Themethod 600 corresponds to the step 530 of FIG. 3. As shown, the method600 begins at step 610, where the application 150 enters a loop toprocess each relevance type. At step 620, the application 150 determineswhether any identity records exist that resolve to the entity and thatare assigned a relevance score of the given relevance type. If so, themethod 600 proceeds to step 630, where the application 150 determines,for the entity, a relevance score of the given relevance type, based therelevance scores of the given relevance type that are assigned to theidentity records of the entity. Additionally or alternatively, therelevance score of the given relevance type for the entity may also bedetermined at least in part on a characteristic of the set of identityrecords that resolve to the entity, where the characteristic may notnecessarily be evident from any individual identity record of the set.After the step 630, the application 150 determines whether morerelevance types remain to be processed (step 640). If so, the method 600returns to the step 610 to process a next relevance type. Otherwise, themethod 600 proceeds to step 650, where the application 150 determines,for the entity, an overall relevance score, based on one or morerelevance scores of different relevance types previously determined forthe entity. After the step 650, the method 600 terminates.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart depicting a method 700 for processing a querybased on relevance types, according to one embodiment of the invention.Once the relevance scores are computed for the entities in accordancewith the method 600 of FIG. 6, the application 150 may process queriesbased on relevance types. To this end, the method 700 begins at step710, where the application 150 receives a query from a user. The querymay include one or more conditions pertaining to the relevance types.For example, the query may specify to retrieve only identity recordsthat satisfy a minimum or maximum threshold value for a given relevancetype. At step 720, the application 150 determines whether the queryspecifies to retrieve identifies based on a relevance type. If so, theapplication 150 retrieves identifies based on the relevance type (step725). Otherwise, at step 730, the application 150 determines whether thequery specifies to retrieve entities based on a relevance type. If so,the application 150 retrieves entities based on the relevance type (step730). Otherwise, at step 740, the application 150 determines whether thequery specifies to retrieve entities based on an overall relevancescore. If so, the application 150 retrieves entities based on theoverall relevance score (step 740). Otherwise, at step 750, theapplication 150 retrieves identities or entities based on other criteriaas specified by the query. After the steps 725, 735, 745, or 750, themethod 700 terminates.

Advantageously, embodiments of the invention provide techniques forconfiguring an entity resolution application to support distinctrelevance types. One embodiment provides identity records to theapplication, where the identity records are assigned relevance scores ofdistinct relevance types. Upon determining that the identity recordsrefer to a common individual, the application resolves the identityrecords into an entity representing the common individual. Theapplication then determines, for the entity representing the commonindividual and from the identity records, at least the relevance scoresof the distinct relevance types. Advantageously, the application maygenerate alerts and/or respond to queries pertaining to the distinctrelevance types, thereby providing users of the application withimproved flexibility and convenience in discovering relevant identifiesand/or entities.

While the foregoing is directed to embodiments of the present invention,other and further embodiments of the invention may be devised withoutdeparting from the basic scope thereof, and the scope thereof isdetermined by the claims that follow.

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer program product configured to providetyped entity relevance scores in an identity resolution system, based ontyped identity relevance scores, the computer program productcomprising: a non-transitory computer-readable medium havingcomputer-readable program code embodied therewith, the computer-readableprogram code comprising: computer-readable program code configured toaccess a plurality of identity records in the identity resolutionsystem, wherein the plurality of identity records includes at least: (i)a first identity record having an identity relevance score of a firstrelevance type; and (ii) a second identity record having an identityrelevance score of a second relevance type different from the firstrelevance type, each identity relevance score representing a respectivemeasure of importance of an individual to which the identity recordhaving the respective identity relevance score pertains;computer-readable program code configured to resolve, upon determiningthe plurality of identity records refer to a common individual, theplurality of identity records into an entity representing the commonindividual; and computer-readable program code configured to determine,for the entity representing the common individual and based on one ormore predefined functions of the identity relevance scores in theplurality of identity records, at least an entity relevance score of thefirst relevance type and an entity relevance score of the secondrelevance type by operation of one or more computer processors whenexecuting the computer-readable program code, each entity relevancescore representing a respective measure of importance of the commonindividual represented by the entity.
 2. The computer program product ofclaim 1, wherein the computer-readable program code further comprises:computer-readable program code configured to determine, from thedetermined entity relevance scores of the first and second relevancetypes, an overall entity relevance score for the entity representing thecommon individual.
 3. The computer program product of claim 2, whereinthe computer-readable program code further comprises: computer-readableprogram code configured to generate an alert upon determining that athreshold is exceeded by at least one of: (i) the identity relevancescore of the first relevance type of the first identity record; (ii) theidentity relevance score of the second relevance type of the secondidentity record; (iii) the entity relevance score of the first relevancetype of the entity; (iv) the entity relevance score of the secondrelevance type of the entity; and (v) the overall entity relevance scorefor the entity.
 4. The computer program product of claim 1, wherein thecomputer-readable program code further comprises: computer-readableprogram code configured to determine the identity relevance score of thefirst relevance type of the first identity record has been modified;computer-readable program code configured to determine, for the entityrepresenting the common individual, an updated entity relevance score ofthe first relevance type, based on the modified identity relevance scoreof the first relevance type of the first identity record.
 5. Thecomputer program product of claim 1, further comprising:computer-readable program code configured to compute, for the entityrepresenting the common individual and upon determining that theplurality of identity records satisfies predefined criteria, an updatedentity relevance score of the first relevance type.
 6. The computerprogram product of claim 1, wherein the identity relevance score of thefirst relevance type is provided based on at least one of: (i) userinput; (ii) one or more events pertaining to the first identity record;and (iii) one or more roles assigned to the first identity record. 7.The computer program product of claim 1, wherein the plurality ofidentity records is determined to refer to a common individual based onone or more predefined resolution rules.
 8. The computer program productof claim 1, wherein the computer-readable program code furthercomprises: computer-readable program code configured to generate, forthe entity representing the common individual, an updated entityrelevance score of the first relevance type based on a count, across theplurality of identity records, of distinct attribute values for anattribute.
 9. A system to provide typed entity relevance scores in anidentity resolution system, based on typed identity relevance scores,the system comprising: one or more computer processors; a memorycontaining a program, which when executed by the one or more computerprocessors is configured to perform an operation comprising: accessing aplurality of identity records in the identity resolution system, whereinthe plurality of identity records includes at least: (i) a firstidentity record having an identity relevance score of a first relevancetype; and (ii) a second identity record having an identity relevancescore of a second relevance type different from the first relevancetype, each identity relevance score representing a respective measure ofimportance of an individual to which the identity record having therespective identity relevance score pertains; upon determining theplurality of identity records refer to a common individual, resolvingthe plurality of identity records into an entity representing the commonindividual; and determining, for the entity representing the commonindividual and based on one or more predefined functions of the identityrelevance scores in the plurality of identity records, at least anentity relevance score of the first relevance type and an entityrelevance score of the second relevance type, each entity relevancescore representing a respective measure of importance of the commonindividual represented by the entity.
 10. The system of claim 9, whereinthe operation further comprises: determining, from the determined entityrelevance scores of the first and second relevance types, an overallentity relevance score for the entity representing the commonindividual.
 11. The system of claim 10, wherein the operation furthercomprises: generating an alert upon determining that a threshold isexceeded by at least one of: (i) the identity relevance score of thefirst relevance type of the first identity record; (ii) the identityrelevance score of the second relevance type of the second identityrecord; (iii) the entity relevance score of the first relevance type ofthe entity; (iv) the entity relevance score of the second relevance typeof the entity; and (v) the overall entity relevance score for theentity.
 12. The system of claim 9, wherein the operation furthercomprises: determining the identity relevance score of the firstrelevance type of the first identity record has been modified;determining, for the entity representing the common individual, anupdated entity relevance score of the first relevance type, based on themodified identity relevance score of the first relevance type of thefirst identity record.
 13. The system of claim 9, wherein the operationfurther comprises: upon determining that the plurality of identityrecords satisfies predefined criteria, determining, for the entityrepresenting the common individual, an updated entity relevance score ofthe first relevance type.
 14. The system of claim 9, wherein theidentity relevance score of the first relevance type is provided basedon at least one of: (i) user input; (ii) one or more events pertainingto the first identity record; and (iii) one or more roles assigned tothe first identity record.
 15. The system of claim 9, wherein theplurality of identity records is determined to refer to a commonindividual based on one or more predefined resolution rules.
 16. Thesystem of claim 9, wherein the operation further comprises: generating,for the entity representing the common individual, an updated entityrelevance score of the first relevance type based on a count, across theplurality of identity records, of distinct attribute values for anattribute.
 17. The system of claim 9, wherein the entity relevance scoreof the first relevance type is determined based on a first predefinedfunction of the identity relevance score of the first relevance type,wherein the entity relevance score of the second relevance type isdetermined based on a first predefined function of the identityrelevance score of the second relevance type, wherein the firstpredefined function is not a function of the identity relevance score ofthe second relevance type, wherein the second predefined function is nota function of the identity relevance score of the first relevance type.18. The system of claim 17, wherein the first predefined function isspecific to the first relevance type, wherein the second predefinedfunction is specific to the second relevance type, wherein the first andsecond predefined functions are distinct functions, wherein each of thefirst and second predefined function is in a form of a respectiveexpression provided based on input from an administrative user, whereinthe entity relevance score of the first relevance type is a differentnumerical score than the identity relevance score of the first relevancetype, wherein the entity relevance score of the second relevance type isa different numerical score than the identity relevance score of thesecond relevance type.
 19. The system of claim 18, wherein each identityrecord is uniquely identified via a record identifier, wherein eachentity record is uniquely identified via an entity identifier differentfrom the record identifier, wherein the first identity record furtherincludes an identity score of the second relevance type, wherein thesecond identity record further includes an identity score of the firstrelevance type, wherein the first predefined function is a function ofthe identity score of the first relevance type in the second identityrecord, wherein the second predefined function is a function of theidentity score of the second relevance type in the first identityrecord.
 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the operation furthercomprises: determining, from the determined entity relevance scores ofthe first and second relevance types, an overall entity relevance scorefor the entity representing the common individual.
 21. The system ofclaim 20, wherein the entity relevance scores of the first and secondrelevance types are determined by an identity resolution application,wherein the administrative user comprises an administrative user of theidentity resolution application, wherein the identity resolutionapplication is configured to independently generate an alert upondetermining that a threshold is exceeded by each individual relevancescore selected from: (i) the identity relevance score of the firstrelevance type of the first identity record; (ii) the identity relevancescore of the second relevance type of the second identity record; (iii)the entity relevance score of the first relevance type of the entity;(iv) the entity relevance score of the second relevance type of theentity; and (v) the overall entity relevance score for the entity. 22.The system of claim 21, wherein the operation further comprises:determining the identity relevance score of the first relevance type ofthe first identity record has been modified; and determining, for theentity representing the common individual, an updated entity relevancescore of the first relevance type, based on the modified identityrelevance score of the first relevance type of the first identityrecord.
 23. The system of claim 22, wherein the operation furthercomprises: upon determining that the plurality of identity recordssatisfies predefined criteria, determining, for the entity representingthe common individual, an updated entity relevance score of the firstrelevance type; wherein the identity resolution application is furtherconfigured to independently determine entity relevance scores based oneach individual predefined function selected from: (i) an average; (ii)a weighted average, wherein each relevance type has a distinct,associated weight; (iii) a sum; (iv) a maximum; and (v) a minimum;wherein the identity resolution application is further configured toindependently retrieve a filtered result set from the identityresolution system and based on each individual user-specified filterincluded in a respective query and selected from: (i) identity recordshaving a specified identity relevance score of a specified relevancetype; (ii) entities having a specified entity relevance score of thespecified relevance type; and (iii) entities having a specified overallentity relevance score.
 24. The system of claim 23, wherein the identityresolution application is further configured to independently providethe identity relevance score of the first relevance type based on eachindividual input selected from: (i) user input; (ii) one or more eventspertaining to the first identity record; and (iii) one or more rolesassigned to the first identity record; wherein the plurality of identityrecords is determined to refer to a common individual based on one ormore predefined resolution rules, and wherein the operation furthercomprises: generating, for the entity representing the commonindividual, an updated entity relevance score of the first relevancetype based on a count, across the plurality of identity records, ofdistinct attribute values for an attribute.